Improving the Resale Price of Your Condominium Association’s Units

Earlier this year I consulted with a condominium association that felt their units were selling at well below market value. We did a review of the grounds, the prices, and the resent selling prices and confirmed their feelings with actual numbers. Their units were selling for well less than value.

The problem comes from two main problems – realtors price units in comparison with the local area, and realtors are really lazy. Ok, maybe not intentionally lazy, but their compensation is based on selling as many units with as little time spent selling each unit. As such, realtors are motivated on encouraging the seller to accept the lowest price possible to list. Owners that balk at the suggested price have a huge uphill battle to convince the realtor to spend time on actively selling a unit at a higher price – they still will list it, but if it takes too much effort to sell then they focus on their portfolio of “easier sales.”

The property is truly unique for the area – a community that is still 15 minutes from the downtown core (non-rush hour) and includes two fully sized ponds (and ponds understates the water immensely), they have large residences for the area, and have an excessively proactive grounds and building maintenance program.

We sat down and talked about a few things with their Resale Committee. It included a variety of initiatives including an aggressive marketing campaign to owners encouraging them to seek their condo board before a realtor, the board building a sales profile for the units – effectively doing the realtor’s job for them, and coaching to owners on how to talk to their realtor and convince them that a higher price for these condos will be as easy to sell as a lower priced unit somewhere else.

One really important factor is to build a large photo and video repository of the water works – with the numerous bunnies, squirrels, and baby ducks that sit amongst the reeds (seriously, it’s a water habitat oasis in Calgary) – and build a portfolio of all the seasons.

The suggestion that the board or other residents be accessible for potential purchasers to meet was also highly encouraged. While in person is best, I noticed a residence in New Jersey has interviews with four of their owners posted positive experiences to YouTube. This is a phenomenal way to show the pride owners have and convey to new purchasers. It will also help make the case to a realtor that these properties will sell at higher costs.

In total, through the consultation, we developed several activities that should add over 8.5 million dollars to the value of all the units in the corporation (adding over 100k/unit) over the next 2 to 3 years. This will bring the units in line with their true value.

$340,000 Garage – Seriously, That’s Just For a Garage

Just a few days ago I blogged about a company in the US building storage space condominiums. These units are not zoned for human habitation and are intended as owned storage on Units range up to 1250 sq.ft. and cost about $82,000. I though it was a fabulous idea – a good use of condominium controlled development, it meets a need, and reasonably priced.

They have been outdone.

A luxury car garage – 34 units total – called The Dens – has been recently been completed near Calgary, Alberta, Canada. The kicker – a 1600 sq.ft. garage was purchased for $340,000.

In other news, reported by the Globe and Mail today, income inequality is rising quickly in Canada.

Maryland Condominiums Have Right To Force Homeowners to Carry Insurance

I am humbled that there is a US state that has given the power to condominium boards to make carrying a homeowner insurance policy mandatory. For a country that often talks about the absolute right of the individual to make their own decisions (any anything, forbid, otherwise is some strange form of socialism, communism, or other ism), a collective has been given the power to require an owner to purchase specific insurance.

With condominiums, may people think that the insurance policy purchased by the condominium covers their units, when in fact this is normally not the case (there are exceptions).  Normally the insurance policy held by the condominium only covers damages and repairs to the common elements – the building envelope and grounds. It does not cover inside the owner’s unit.

For example, if you owned a unit in a condo that burnt down, and the condo is repaired, the corporation policy would rebuild the structure, but not the interior of your unit – the “betterments and improvements.” What’s a betterment or improvement – anything inside your unit. That would include the toilet (yup – the piping would come in, but the actual porcelain toilet is a betterment). It likely wouldn’t include your cabinets, your flooring, your paint, your sinks, and all sorts of stuff. You would have a shell, to fill as you would.

Additional insurance, bought properly, would cover those betterments and improvements (seriously, we don’t see the toilet as an improvement – we think it’s part of the unit, but it is). And because of the danger of fire or water or other loss, I always encourage people to buy the additional insurance.

It’s nice then, having been in the industry long enough to see several major losses, that Maryland will allow the boards to make this additional insurance required to be purchased by their owners. I’m not sure how they will enforce it (it seems a little toothless – what are you going to do, evict the owner?) – but it is good intention.

Some may wonder how few people actually pass on buying insurance – I have a great example. In Calgary, March of 2010, a massive condominium fire in the Millrise left hundreds homeless. Less than half, half, of the owners had additional insurance. That meant more than 100 people would have been left with just a shell of a unit when they were rebuilt, and would have had to pay the additional living expenses of shelter during the months and months to rebuild. Fortunately, the board had made a decision to carry the additional insurance for everyone – which allowed all the units to be rebuilt completely, and the homeless have their expenses covered during the rebuild.

Maryland’s insurance requirement is slightly different than what I described, as it’s a requirement to carry insurance against a deductible (of the common property insurance) for damages originating from their unit. But in general it is the same idea – forcing insurance and reducing the risk of catastrophic loss.

Bella Vista Calgary Interview

On Wednesday 29 June 2011, I was interviewed for CBC Television on a developer’s ability to walk away from buildings that are made with significant structural deficiencies. The story aired at 5PM and 6PM, and was good at expressing the anger being caused by a system that is failing owners.

While it didn’t make the sound bite, I lay the blame fully with the developer. They may indicate the building was passed by the city inspectors, but the inspectors are a lot like police attempting to catch speeders. Overall they help reduce the overall error rate, but they cannot catch everything, and there are developers that will still, wilfully, “drive 225 in a 50 zone” and not be caught. For developers to say “I wasn’t caught by the inspectors, so I hold no blame” is completely without base.

Here is the link to one of the CBC cuts, starting at the 6:55 mark is the condominium segment.

Here’s an article from the Calgary Herald which covers the issue well.